Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Can we please ban these? They're distracting at best, and some of them are extremely annoying.

(And I'm pretty sure at least one of them is a deliberate attempt to be annoying.)

just put them on ignore list.

You can also choose to disable avatars through the settings menu.

If using Chrome, you can:

Block specific avatars with Adblock Plus
block gifs only on Dakka
Only allow avatars to loop a single time, or block them completely
Prevent gifs from loading unless clicked on

That's a big yikes from me dawg. You know you can just block me right? I even made a Stylus script so you can Super Duper Extra Block me. https://userstyles.org/styles/151285/dakkadakka-minor-enhancements

I too would like there to be sweeping restrictions on expression because I am so entitled I think it's legitimate to impose my diktats on everyone else rather than using the much simpler steps to deal with the alleged problem myself.

 ingtaer wrote:
You can also choose to disable avatars through the settings menu.

That works - and it already exists.

WIN/WIN!

I don't want to have to block people entirely and miss their posts in as discussion I'm involved in. And I dont want to miss the majority of avatars from people who aren't being obnoxious, they're very useful in identifying people at a glance. I'm honestly surprised this is even an issue, "no animated avatars/signatures" is such a common rule for good reasons.

So use one of the other simple options that don't require the rest of us to bow to your lofty demands?

Боже мой.

So just do one of these then?

 Ouze wrote:
If using Chrome, you can:

Block specific avatars with Adblock Plus
block gifs only on Dakka
Only allow avatars to loop a single time, or block them completely
Prevent gifs from loading unless clicked on

A lot of the more...prolific users here are distracting at best, and some of them are extremely annoying.

(And I'm pretty sure at least one of them is a deliberately annoying for the Personal LULZ, most times.)

 BaconCatBug wrote:
That's a big yikes from me dawg. You know you can just block me right? I even made a Stylus script so you can Super Duper Extra Block me. https://userstyles.org/styles/151285/dakkadakka-minor-enhancements

Thank ya

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't want to have to block people entirely and miss their posts in as discussion I'm involved in. And I dont want to miss the majority of avatars from people who aren't being obnoxious, they're very useful in identifying people at a glance. I'm honestly surprised this is even an issue, "no animated avatars/signatures" is such a common rule for good reasons.

I'm surprised it's an issue now, given that we've allowed animated avatars for the last 20 years...


There's no need for a ban, given how few people even bother with them to begin with. As with signature images, we take it up with the user directly if someone chooses something particularly obnoxious.

Animated avatars have been on this forum for as long as I've been a member and I don't want to see them leave. It's not been a problem until now. The options above are your best bets.

Besides, what'll HBMC do when he tires of his Knight Avatar and returns to his ever spinning commissar...

 insaniak wrote:

I'm surprised it's an issue now, given that we've allowed animated avatars for the last 20 years...

It hasn't been a problem because most people know how to have some restraint and not abuse the privilege. But, as other sites have found, not everyone can behave reasonably. Call it a case of one person ruining it for everyone, but it's common.

Now, I'd be happy if BCB's obnoxious avatar (and any similar ones) was removed individually, but I imagine there would be complaints about being singled out in the absence of a uniform rule.

 Peregrine wrote:

It hasn't been a problem because most people know how to have some restraint and not abuse the privilege. But, as other sites have found, not everyone can behave reasonably. Call it a case of one person ruining it for everyone, but it's common.

Then in that one case, you send a message to a mod, and if we agree it's an issue we'll remove it.

Now, I'd be happy if BCB's obnoxious avatar (and any similar ones) was removed individually, but I imagine there would be complaints about being singled out in the absence of a uniform rule.

People complain about being 'singled out' even when there is a uniform rule.

In this particular case, though, given that as far as I'm aware you're the only one who has complained about BCB's avatar, it really would be a case of singling out one person just to keep one other person happy.


Your complaint has been noted, and we'll keep it under consideration if further complaints arise in the future. Alternatively, you could try discussing the issue politely with the user in question.

 Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

I'm surprised it's an issue now, given that we've allowed animated avatars for the last 20 years...

It hasn't been a problem because most people know how to have some restraint and not abuse the privilege. But, as other sites have found, not everyone can behave reasonably. Call it a case of one person ruining it for everyone, but it's common.

Now, I'd be happy if BCB's obnoxious avatar (and any similar ones) was removed individually, but I imagine there would be complaints about being singled out in the absence of a uniform rule.

From my point of view, your avatar is obnoxious.

I like how your first thought after having someone disagree with you was to cry to the mod team.

A 'uniform rule' that is applied inconsistently and unevenly is not uniform, without even getting into how subjective and open to abuse a term like 'impolite' is.

A lot of Dakka rules lack certainty and don't make up for it with flexibility.

 insaniak wrote:
Your complaint has been noted, and we'll keep it under consideration if further complaints arise in the future. Alternatively, you could try discussing the issue politely with the user in question.

Thank you for the obvious attempt to try and cause a bunch of "complaints" so you can pursue your personal vendetta.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Your complaint has been noted, and we'll keep it under consideration if further complaints arise in the future. Alternatively, you could try discussing the issue politely with the user in question.

Thank you for the obvious attempt to try and cause a bunch of "complaints" so you can pursue your personal vendetta.

Er... what?

Would you prefer I just remove your avatar and move on?

 insaniak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Your complaint has been noted, and we'll keep it under consideration if further complaints arise in the future. Alternatively, you could try discussing the issue politely with the user in question.

Thank you for the obvious attempt to try and cause a bunch of "complaints" so you can pursue your personal vendetta.

Er... what?

Would you prefer I just remove your avatar and move on?

Which would just prove my point. Your post is basically saying "If enough people complain, we'll take unfair action against this one user."

I think you are misinterpreting what he said, BCB.

Ban cars because They are loud and annoying cause that one prick down the road modified his one!!!

/Sarcasm



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nels1031 wrote:
I think you are misinterpreting what he said, BCB.

Yep, if it were to become a problem (cough political propaganda f.e. With clearly signaling signs / messages, i'd imagine to take action in such a case would be prudent.)

I think you are too, BCB.

 nels1031 wrote:
I think you are misinterpreting what he said, BCB.

I know exactly what he was saying and so does he. It's well known the Mod team plays favourites (and that's fine as long as they are honest about it).

It's just annoying because I know for sure if I had made a thread like this (clearly and rudely aimed at a single other user) I'd have been censured for it immediately.

If enough people complain, that's a sign that there's an issue, and we address it in whatever manner seems appropriate.

That's how a community functions. Sometimes, the one person forgoes their preference for the comfort of the community as a whole. If that seems unfair to you, then that's a shame... but it's how our society functions, and it's how we've always run this board.

I do note though that you jumped straight to the conclusion that complaints would result in your avatar automatically being removed, despite that not actually being what I said. I said that we would take complaints under consideration.

I'm not really sure what you expect to achieve with the antagonistic attitude.

Moving on.